So what can nonprofits give up for Lent?
Give something up?? Are you kidding me? We're just barely making it as it is!
Hear me out. This blog has been brewing for days. Hope it's not too late. It is Ash Wednesday night.
In trying times, in a highly competitive landscape, it may be a good idea to do something counterintuitive. Unless you're on a really good roll, maybe a little change isn't a bad idea. Here are a few things you might consider changing for the next 40 days:
1) Give up meetings. Do you really need to have a staff meeting each week? A conference call every Monday? A board meeting every two months? You can still talk to these people if you really need to. A break in scheduled meetings will be a very refreshing change for people having trouble sleeping because of stress.
2) Give up editing every grant your grant writer puts in front of you. If you trust the person writing proposals, give them the responsibility to get it right and get it done. You'll get an extra few hours every week that you spend "improving" proposals. And you'll probably get more proposals submitted in 40 days than you have in the last 60 days.
3) Give up watching the news about how bad the economy is. At least give it up after 12pm so you can sleep better at night. Maybe the extra 15 minutes will give you more time to focus on your mission.
4) Give up an hour a week you spend on your assigned job and spend it with one of your constituents - client or donor. You'll be amazed at what you learn - and you'll probably do your job better.
5) Give up staying tuned to your regular source of news and information all day long. If you look for a new source every day for 40 days, chances are you'll find at least two or three keepers. Not a bad addition for a rapidly changing world.
That's it for for now. There have got to be more things we can give up. Stay tuned.
Showing posts with label change. Show all posts
Showing posts with label change. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Hope is Not a Strategy
There's lots of hope in the air these days. With two wars going on, the economy in a shambles, both poles melting, and another half dozen issues over which to wring your hands, you'd better have hope.
As my friend Mark told me: "Both candidates have pledged to lower my taxes, improve my healthcare, make sure my children will be well educated and have clean air to breathe in a country with perfectly safe borders. So regardless of who wins the election, things will get better starting next week. They promised."
It's sort of amusing to see these guys on the national stage selling hope. Often during my long sales career, I spent more time than I wanted selling hope during sales forecast reviews. When the sales aren't there - they aren't there. But try telling that to hardheaded, pollyanna sales managers. When they can't handle reality, it's time to start selling hope.
Now I don't mean to be coming down hard on hope or optimism. We know from life - and the Good Book - that trials create endurance; endurance creates character; and character creates hope. Hope does not disappoint as long as it's placed in the right direction. I've got plenty of hope. I'd like to skip that trials / endurance / character building thing as much as possible in the future.
When it comes to optimism I have gained some wisdom over the last few decades. I am a "recovering obsessor." Yes, I've worried about a lot of small - and big - things that just never turned out to be a problem. It's taken me a while, but I've learned there really is a reason to be optimistic. That's based on personal history.
When you look at national and world history, economists are telling us that things will be okay - eventually. The presidential candidates are certainly telling us this. I do believe this to be true.
But historical knowledge is only based on what has been observed. For many dozen centuries, people believed that only white swans existed. Then Dutch explorers, in 1697, discovered a black swan in Australia.
Based on this improbable discovery, Nassim Taleb has written a philosophy book about our exposure to rare events. There's a fascinating PBS interview with him and the mathematician with whom he studied. This book may not be a page turner, but it does have some important implications for nonprofits.
The world grows smaller and more complex each day. Fragility, unintended consequences, and more interdependence affects us all - at work, at home, throughout the community. What are we going to do about it?
Last month I asked many questions, all related to change for your nonprofit. Of course, now I have more questions.
Are you exposed in the current economy? Are you preparing to make changes? Do you have some real plans for what's next?
What is your strategy? Is it hope?
As my friend Mark told me: "Both candidates have pledged to lower my taxes, improve my healthcare, make sure my children will be well educated and have clean air to breathe in a country with perfectly safe borders. So regardless of who wins the election, things will get better starting next week. They promised."
It's sort of amusing to see these guys on the national stage selling hope. Often during my long sales career, I spent more time than I wanted selling hope during sales forecast reviews. When the sales aren't there - they aren't there. But try telling that to hardheaded, pollyanna sales managers. When they can't handle reality, it's time to start selling hope.
Now I don't mean to be coming down hard on hope or optimism. We know from life - and the Good Book - that trials create endurance; endurance creates character; and character creates hope. Hope does not disappoint as long as it's placed in the right direction. I've got plenty of hope. I'd like to skip that trials / endurance / character building thing as much as possible in the future.
When it comes to optimism I have gained some wisdom over the last few decades. I am a "recovering obsessor." Yes, I've worried about a lot of small - and big - things that just never turned out to be a problem. It's taken me a while, but I've learned there really is a reason to be optimistic. That's based on personal history.
When you look at national and world history, economists are telling us that things will be okay - eventually. The presidential candidates are certainly telling us this. I do believe this to be true.
But historical knowledge is only based on what has been observed. For many dozen centuries, people believed that only white swans existed. Then Dutch explorers, in 1697, discovered a black swan in Australia.
Based on this improbable discovery, Nassim Taleb has written a philosophy book about our exposure to rare events. There's a fascinating PBS interview with him and the mathematician with whom he studied. This book may not be a page turner, but it does have some important implications for nonprofits.
The world grows smaller and more complex each day. Fragility, unintended consequences, and more interdependence affects us all - at work, at home, throughout the community. What are we going to do about it?
Last month I asked many questions, all related to change for your nonprofit. Of course, now I have more questions.
Are you exposed in the current economy? Are you preparing to make changes? Do you have some real plans for what's next?
What is your strategy? Is it hope?
Saturday, September 27, 2008
The Times, They Are A Changin'
Bob Dylan sang that over four decades ago. It's still true. Read any newspapers lately? Watched any newscasts lately? There's lots of speculation out there. The only thing certain is that we're about to see change like we've never seen it before.
So far, the news is mostly about the commercial world. The Chron and the AFP magazine, Advancing Philanthropy, are doing a pretty good job of summarizing the potential effects on nonprofits. How are you going to manage change?
Paul Otellini is the current CEO of Intel, the world's largest manufacturer of microprocessors. He's a good one for nonprofit ED's to use as a model.
Hmmmm. Okay. You're saying: Intel, $40 something billion a year. My heart and soul cause for good, $400K/year....give or take a few hundred thousand dollars. Exactly how do we make this comparison?
In the WSJ this Saturday, Otellini gave some interesting opinions on management. He said, "A CEO's main job, because you have access to all the information, is to see the need to change before anyone else does."
What's the job of an ED? To meet the mission. Take care of your clients. Maintain relationships with donors. Clearly present the cause with passion. Take care of your staff so they'll take care of you.
You have all the information. You're undoubtedly watching expenses and double checking your revenue forecast. Are you seeing the need to change?
Now is also a very good time to eliminate duplicate services. Who can help you? Where can you partner? Who can join you in the paceline? There are some unhealthy nonprofits that will not survive the next year. That change may be sad, but not necessarily bad.
Who (what organization) can provide the best service for the clients? Once the egos get put aside, that question is often easier to answer.
If your organization is struggling to make it, do you see the need to change? Now is a good time to look at options to merge with a like minded partner.
If your organization is strong, will it stay strong forever? Do you see the need to change? Now is a good time to join forces with a like minded partner.
Merging organizations is never easy, but change is always necessary.
So far, the news is mostly about the commercial world. The Chron and the AFP magazine, Advancing Philanthropy, are doing a pretty good job of summarizing the potential effects on nonprofits. How are you going to manage change?
Paul Otellini is the current CEO of Intel, the world's largest manufacturer of microprocessors. He's a good one for nonprofit ED's to use as a model.
Hmmmm. Okay. You're saying: Intel, $40 something billion a year. My heart and soul cause for good, $400K/year....give or take a few hundred thousand dollars. Exactly how do we make this comparison?
In the WSJ this Saturday, Otellini gave some interesting opinions on management. He said, "A CEO's main job, because you have access to all the information, is to see the need to change before anyone else does."
What's the job of an ED? To meet the mission. Take care of your clients. Maintain relationships with donors. Clearly present the cause with passion. Take care of your staff so they'll take care of you.
You have all the information. You're undoubtedly watching expenses and double checking your revenue forecast. Are you seeing the need to change?
Now is also a very good time to eliminate duplicate services. Who can help you? Where can you partner? Who can join you in the paceline? There are some unhealthy nonprofits that will not survive the next year. That change may be sad, but not necessarily bad.
Who (what organization) can provide the best service for the clients? Once the egos get put aside, that question is often easier to answer.
If your organization is struggling to make it, do you see the need to change? Now is a good time to look at options to merge with a like minded partner.
If your organization is strong, will it stay strong forever? Do you see the need to change? Now is a good time to join forces with a like minded partner.
Merging organizations is never easy, but change is always necessary.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Competent or Brilliant?
What’s your nonprofit like? Is it really good, semi-great, or just limping along?
Master marketer Seth Godin in his book, Small is the New Big makes the point that people and companies can either be competent or brilliant. Given those two choices, I think you would hope your organization is competent. Or would you?
Godin contends that competent organizations have “a predictable, reliable process for solving a particular set of problems. They solve the problem the same way, every time.” Sounds good to me.
Competence is a good thing when you’re going out for your favorite burger and fries. You want what you want. You don’t want any variations. You depend on getting exactly those flavors you crave.
A competent burger joint in my neck of the woods is Gazeebo Burgers. They have maybe the best vege burger in town. It’s good food at a good price. There buns are great! It’s always consistent. It’s something you can depend on when you’re hungry. The good folks at Gazeebo Burgers are very competent in what they do.
But it’s real tough to get a green hatch chili burger there.
A brilliant restaurant a couple of miles away is Tramontana. These guys get a “wow” when it comes to satisfying your taste buds! But their menu changes on a regular basis. It’s almost always great…but not always always great. Sometimes, they don’t come close. It’s those times that I find myself wishing for that good ol' Gazeebo burger.
The Tramontana chef creates menus based on what provisions are available. He adapts to what is in season. Often those creations are brilliant. But they’re not to everyone’s tastes. That's the risk he takes with changing menus.
So there are my (and Godin’s) comparisons of a competent eatery to a brilliant restaurant. The competent is consistent. To the point of always being the same. Not a bad thing as long as you don’t have to adapt to change.
Now are you getting my point about organizations? When is the last time you looked at your strategic plan? When is the last time you had to change because your clients or your donors were facing new challenges?
It’s good to be competent. Necessary even. But you have got to have a little of that brilliant gene in your organizational DNA. You need it not just to react and adapt to change, but to anticipate it. Otherwise you may soon find a brilliant burger joint moving in around the corner.
Master marketer Seth Godin in his book, Small is the New Big makes the point that people and companies can either be competent or brilliant. Given those two choices, I think you would hope your organization is competent. Or would you?
Godin contends that competent organizations have “a predictable, reliable process for solving a particular set of problems. They solve the problem the same way, every time.” Sounds good to me.
Competence is a good thing when you’re going out for your favorite burger and fries. You want what you want. You don’t want any variations. You depend on getting exactly those flavors you crave.
A competent burger joint in my neck of the woods is Gazeebo Burgers. They have maybe the best vege burger in town. It’s good food at a good price. There buns are great! It’s always consistent. It’s something you can depend on when you’re hungry. The good folks at Gazeebo Burgers are very competent in what they do.
But it’s real tough to get a green hatch chili burger there.
A brilliant restaurant a couple of miles away is Tramontana. These guys get a “wow” when it comes to satisfying your taste buds! But their menu changes on a regular basis. It’s almost always great…but not always always great. Sometimes, they don’t come close. It’s those times that I find myself wishing for that good ol' Gazeebo burger.
The Tramontana chef creates menus based on what provisions are available. He adapts to what is in season. Often those creations are brilliant. But they’re not to everyone’s tastes. That's the risk he takes with changing menus.
So there are my (and Godin’s) comparisons of a competent eatery to a brilliant restaurant. The competent is consistent. To the point of always being the same. Not a bad thing as long as you don’t have to adapt to change.
Now are you getting my point about organizations? When is the last time you looked at your strategic plan? When is the last time you had to change because your clients or your donors were facing new challenges?
It’s good to be competent. Necessary even. But you have got to have a little of that brilliant gene in your organizational DNA. You need it not just to react and adapt to change, but to anticipate it. Otherwise you may soon find a brilliant burger joint moving in around the corner.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)